When I was a boy of fourteen, my father was so ignorant I could hardly stand to have the old man around. But when I got to be twenty-one, I was astonished at how much the old man had learned in seven years. - attributed to Mark Twain

I hope for the 80-400 replacement (a rumoured 100-500VR lens) - given itīs only one stop slower at the long end (or f/4 @ 400mm) this could become a really nice (and carryable) alternative to look for.

We don't spend money on other things that don't net any value, like going out to movies or spending it on frivolous items. That's why we end up with money left over at the end of the month starting 2011.

Yeah...disgusting, isn't it. It's all a choice. You want something, you save up for it. Somethin' I learned from my Dad.

My "next" lens came home about a week ago. I wanted a lens with VR (prior to this, none of mine had it). Since I have a 70-300, I wanted something a little wider, and something close to the 70 part of the range, so I went with a 16-85mm.
So far I ave been playing around with it, and I enjoy being able to go 16 at times. The VR is very cool. So far I am very pleased.
I think that now, my next lens will be a fast 70-200. (it's going to be quite a while before I can save up for that)
Russ

Interests:Event photography, candids, getting photos of people at their best.

Posted 24 March 2010 - 05:54 PM

Don, I periodically will shoot parachuters and some air shows. You can always rent the big "bad boys" when you need them. "But" the cost doesn't ends at the lens. You will also have to rent the proper tripod, wimberley tripod head, and lens plate to handle the camera setup.

I should get this setup anyway. I've already got a Bogen 3051 tripod which is built like a tank, so all I need is the gimbal head and the plates. I already have a Nikkor 300/2.8 AFS and a Tamron 400/4 MF (with the 1.4x and 2x converters), so it's not like I don't already have glass that would be appropriate for this kind of setup. As of now, I have a Bogen video head on that tripod and it's actually pretty decent, but a gimbal it ain't.

D

Edited by justshootit, 24 March 2010 - 05:59 PM.

Don
==========================================================
Digital: D610 backed up by a D1x. Quoted from an unknown source by a fellow planeteer, "Never get rid of a working D1x." I've got to agree.

Film: N90s, F3, F100, F4s, C330s. A few lenses.

Why film photography? I like shooting with the equipment. 6x6 Velvia slides from a C330 have an appeal all their own.

Why automated 35mm/Digital cameras? Event photography is about capturing moments. It often requires quick response. Well done automaton can be your friend or your enemy. It all depends on knowing what it can and can't do. "A man's got to know his (camera's) limitations." paraphrasing Dirty Harry...

Interests:Event photography, candids, getting photos of people at their best.

Posted 24 March 2010 - 05:57 PM

I need to rethink my next AF-S Lens choice. Since the 70-200 f/2.8 is out of my price range at the moment, I think I'm going to go with the AF-S DX 35mm f/1.8. THEN...the AF-S VR 70-200mm f/2.8!

Look for an 80-200/2.8D or pre-D. I have used both and they make fantastic images; I've got the pre-D version now -- got it for ~$485 -- and it works great on my D70. Also, Jim (james23p) has a Tamron 70-200/2.8 and he's very happy with the images it makes.

D

Don
==========================================================
Digital: D610 backed up by a D1x. Quoted from an unknown source by a fellow planeteer, "Never get rid of a working D1x." I've got to agree.

Film: N90s, F3, F100, F4s, C330s. A few lenses.

Why film photography? I like shooting with the equipment. 6x6 Velvia slides from a C330 have an appeal all their own.

Why automated 35mm/Digital cameras? Event photography is about capturing moments. It often requires quick response. Well done automaton can be your friend or your enemy. It all depends on knowing what it can and can't do. "A man's got to know his (camera's) limitations." paraphrasing Dirty Harry...

Looks like the 70-200 f/2.8 is getting closer to becoming my next acquisition over the 35mm f/1.8. My Momma is givin' me a boost in the lens and new body department...and there is a distinct possibility that I may be getting the D300s as well as the AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8G IF-ED VR II and to top it all off, my wife manages to get $700.00 off CDN MSRP on that lens. ~sigh~ Life is getting much, much better.

I hope to have that 35mm f/1.8 in my lens kit at some point, but for me at this juncture (my mom wants me to get the business up and running) the 70-200 VRII will be the better lens to go after, especially if my mother gets behind my business like she's appearing to do so. Hopefully, I'll have the D300s and the 70-200mm f/2.8 by August. As my friend (who shoots weddings) needs a photographer second.

Now that I've got my AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm G ED VR II, I now have NO idea what I should go for next. Maybe the AF-S 14-24mm f/2.8 or maybe the AF-S 24-70mm f/2.8...or should I go for the AF-S VR 400mm f/2.8 ED-IF...or...the AF-S VR 600mm f/4 or...the AF-S 200-400 f/4 or...